First, a disclaimer: I did not go to CPAC, didn’t watch any of the speeches, noticed only a few headlines about it, and of course, I am not a Ron Paul fan.

Instead, I thought I’d write a fresh post on the issue of the main message coming from CPAC last weekend. As we’ve all been made aware, Ron Paul stole…er, rigged…I mean, won the straw poll released on Sunday (that was for all the conspiracy theorists among us).

Whether or not Ron Paul is the man to lead the masses is beside the point. The message is loud and clear: fiscal restraint and responsibility need to be the leading edge, the rallying cry, and the media message this fall. Smaller government, fiscal discipline, and individual liberties all lie at the heart of what Paul has championed over the years. Regardless of whether we think Ron Paul is a crazy old coot, or a long-lost wandering extra from “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”, his message is sinking in with a growing percentage of people. Maybe CPAC was a tipping point.

Even if we take out half of his “supporters”, Ron Paul still ends up at 15%. He finishes second. Second. We all knew Mitt would pull numbers; but for Paul to get that many, and for the rest of the pack to poll so low, illustrates the point. The people want action; they want something done. Enough of the personality games and Fox News show hosts; we need real action in real time. There’s too much at stake, and not much time left, especially as the Communist-in-Chief keeps transforming us into a “Workers’ Paradise” more and more each day.

If we don’t secure the purse strings soon, there will be no treasury left. We will become vassals of the Chinese. They may even start calling us “Taiwan East”. Our military will not only be unable to sustain their campaigns; they may even need to go through massive reductions in force and strength, thus rendering our own country vulnerable, or neutering us as our interests around the world are violated and taken away.

Republicans, ignore the message at your own peril.

To be fair, there are some who already get it. Mike Pence gets it. Paul Ryan, whose Roadmap for America is the most appealing thing out there right now, gets it. Demint and Coburn get it. My own HR Rep Platts gets it. But the fact that I can name individuals should tell you how dispiriting it is that I can’t just lump all the Repubs together and say that they all get it.

Republicans, if you don’t hear this message and embrace it like you’re squeezing the life out of Angelina Jolie, two things willl happen:

1 – there will come a third party split, one that will definitely affect you more negatively than any of the moderate or conservative Dems still possibly remaining in the Dem party. This will lead to…

2 – Obama dumping a crap load of his nation-destroying agenda on us for 6 more years, with the consequences reverberating for a decade, if not a generation.

It’s morning in America, Republicans. The six AM alarm is going off. You gonna get it?


  • Brian H

    Boru. I am sure you are a nice person but a one trick pony you are, as well.

    I think we ALL appreciate your passion and input in the forum but why is it that your, and others, contributions only exist when Ron Paul is the topic of conversation? Don’t you have opinions about things that are not Ron Paul related?

    It’s kinda creepy.

    • Promise Kept

      Brian, I’ll speak up for the “others” you refer to. The reason I dropped off the radar here for several days, was because I opened a thread on another forum, and felt it my duty to maintain an effective interaction on its subject.

      Just as you would have different expectations for the conversational boundaries at a church potluck and a pool-hall tavern, wise people naturally tend to exercise their free-speech rights within those protocols if they want to be persuasive.

      Ron Pauls’ Campaign for Liberty is an organization that formed immediately after Dr. Pauls’ Presidential race to help educate and direct the enthusiasm shared by all ages, but especially among the younger generation, to pass along Pauls’ mantle and help current and future leaders to more effectively restore essential Liberty to the place it deserves to be in our once free country.

      It’s a tough enough row to hoe as it is, but when it upsets “the church ladies” here, and gets so few thoughtful replies, its easy to understand why the “pool-hall” crowd offers a better place to expect to be heard.

      Knowing the CPAC poll would be a likely thread here, I thought I’d check in to see how deeply it might be examined here.

      David gave the only answer that I thought hit the nail on the head when he wrote,” This straw poll is less about Ron Paul winning and more about the continued fact that there is no one in politics who is stepping up as a conservative leader, at least in the eyes of the rank and file.”

      It took two lengthy threads to even find one participant who pointed out the obvious, but I would acknowledge WilliamK and JE for coming close in the last thread.

      Sorry if that seems “kinda creepy” to you, Brian, but if that’s all it takes to creep you out, then I plead guilty as charged.

      P.S. I know it was kind of late, but I did leave a reply to your last post on Jasons’ thread.

      • Brian H

        Thanks for the reply. I appreciate your response. I respect your posititions and would enjoy hearing them on issues other than Paul.

      • Red State Eddio

        Promise Kept – I appreciated your response as well. It was reasonable and well thought out. While I may not be a fan of Mr. Paul himself (but some of my best friends are!), I align myself with a number of positions that he advocates on issues like budgeting, etc. I opined as much in the post. I think that beyond the hangups with the messenger, the message does resonate with many on this site. I think of the Goldwater/Reagan example: while Goldwater was perceived to be a pariah after ’64, Reagan took most of what he said and applied it in a way that many embraced by ’80. I believe the same can be applied here, and I strongly suspect that if Congressman Paul was IM-ing with us, he’d reiterate that also. He’d rather have a guy/gal who can lead the charge and win, as opposed to it being him and only him.

        My question would be: if there was another personality providing the same kind of fiscal message, would people in your camp be willing and able to support said candidate?

        I ask that question because I still detect in your posts a hint of pranoia, or maybe just irritation, that we’re not all RP acolytes. So I am wondering to what degree is it the person, and to what degree is it the message?

        • Promise Kept

          Brian and Eddio – Away earning a living and tending two threads elsewhere, I didn’t want you to think that I hadn’t read your kind words, nor taken your challenges lightly.

          Brian first, I thought I had done well enough keeping the spotlight off Paul, and onto the question of where else should we look for a truly “electable” conservative, if one can’t be found by those willing to participate in this poll.

          Eddio – To answer your question, personality has only as much appeal as it relates to the core principal of essential Liberty. ANY candidate whose commitment to keep and defend the constitutional boundaries of their stewardship is alright by me.

          Paranoia is an irrational or illogical fear, and my apparent irritation has nothing to do with honoring anyones’ acolytes.

          For example, hear is a clip of Judge Andrew Napolitano interviewing Adam Kokesh, candidate for New Mexicos’ third district.

          At a fund-raiser for Kokesh last Independence Day, Jordon Page gave an artistically intense performance of his own campaign rewrite of Pink Floyds, ” The Wall”.

  • David Kaiser, Editor

    That’s ok Boru, you blew your cover as a sane human being years ago.

    • Boru

      If loving the founding principles is wrong, I don’t wanna be right.

      • Troy La Mana

        I hear a song there…..

    • Promise Kept

      David, Thank you for your post above. I meant to get back to you sooner, but I explained why to Brian below.

      I appreciate the self-depreciating humor that you opened your post with, but like they say, all effective humor must have a measure of truth.

      “Sure, there are plenty out there who want to lead, but they are all flawed, at least I see them as being considered flawed by the majority of conservatives.”

      David, at that point you gave a perfect segue into the only answer I specifically sought in all of my current, two-thread participation on this site.

      Here is my copy and pasting of my answer to Brian, about your award winning comment:

      “Knowing the CPAC poll would be a likely thread here, I thought I’d check in to see how deeply it might be examined here.

      David gave the only answer that I thought hit the nail on the head when he wrote,” This straw poll is less about Ron Paul winning and more about the continued fact that there is no one in politics who is stepping up as a conservative leader, at least in the eyes of the rank and file.””

      I call it award-winning because, if you don’t already have a copy of “End The Fed”, I would consider it an honor to send you a copy.

      Doing my own fact checking, I must admit I was off by a year on my earliest entries here. It was the CPAC 2008 straw-poll that I first weighed in on the definition of “conservative” as posed by the breakdown of demographic specifics of those who participated in that poll.

      If you can go back, look at my effort to work up a composite sketch of what the suspected, “true conservative” candidate might look like. I tried to work through the demographics that the CPAC participants offered. As I remember, I didn’t take the lack of poll participants as telling as much then as now.

      There is much more that I wish I could write about your post, but life is calling for my participation. Thanks again for your prize-winning answer!

  • Rusty Shackleford


    David I read this book that you posted here. I cleared my mind and paragraph by paragraph I checked agree/disagree and they (to my surprise) were all agree. Until of course your train derailed at anoiting Bill Clinton the master of bringing both sides together. I actually think you fell asleep right there and woke up writing a totally different blog.

    Anyway, to your point, I think people are screaming for someone like you mentioned. and the 2008 “recycle bin” just isn’t going to cut it this time.

    Great post tho.

    • David Kaiser, Editor


      I don’t ask you to like Clinton, he was a moral slug, but don’t use your moral disdain of a guy to ignore someone who was brilliant and savvy politician.

      Look past the behavior and look at the data – he did build a coalition that is quite formidible.

    • Red State Eddio

      I agree with DK. Clinton, for all his moral compromises, was a darned good politician in the political sense. He saw the coming tidal wave backlash against his liberal first year policies, and tacked to the center, and survived the tumult. Many of his congressional Dem’s did not. A good % of his policies post-1994 were much more moderate, some even advocated by conservatives.

      I don’t know of anyone who can manage that feat these days simply because of the polarity of Obama: he is SO far left, nobody wants to be anywhere near him. Combine that with a super-majority driven by radicals like Pelosi & Reid, and there’s no way anyone can be temperate. “Temperate” is mitigating the extremes of Obama-Pelosi-Reid.

      But in a less stident environment, with a clear balance of power, and a more temperate agenda, someone like Mitt has the gravitas now to pull it off. The rest…maybe…maybe not…but it would be work.

      • Brian H

        I think Clinton’s brilliant political skills are a bit overrated. Clinton’s political skills managed to lose him the congress, lose him his Health-Care, get him impeached, and derail his agenda. He moved to the center not out of grand political saviness but out of political desperation.

        Clinton won two elections in 1992 and 1996 where the overwhelming majority of the American republic voted for someone else.

        In a way I kinda like Willy, but, his brilliance as a politician tends to be a bit of stretch. In my opinion.

  • Boru

    And Ron Paul won the CPAC poll…BFD. It’s all about the actual record…not the ACU’s interpretation of his record.

    We don’t need Fox, CPAC, ACU, etc. interpretations of peoples’ records. In fact, those organizations were purposely created to manipulate people through false authority.

    The best case you imperialists can make is that since the masses are so easy to manipulate, it’s best to rule them benevolently before someone else rules them harshly. But wait, this is what you mean when you say that the US should use its power to intervene in other peoples’ countries…right?

    • Alaina

      Just out of curiousity… if you were walking down the street and saw someone getting beat up, would you:
      A: Stop to help
      B: Call the police and keep walking
      C: Do nothing

      Us “imperialists” as you’re so fond of calling us, would pick option A. It sounds like you would pick option C.

  • kristen

    My favorite part of this post? “Crap load.” Very eloquently stated. ;-)

    • Red State Eddio

      Why thank you. I just noticed the verb used to describe the action…wow, that’s a fully functional metaphor there!

  • Alaina

    We have 32 months to learn more about him.

  • Boru

    Pence is just another Imperial-can who talks the conservative talk, but walks the warfare imperialist walk.

    Go beyond speeches.

    It doesn’t matter how many Scott Browns you throw at us, we go by record.

    • Alaina

      Actually, he has a 100% rating with ACU in 2009 and 2008 and has a 99.56% lifetime rating.

      I’m in support of ACU’s position on warfare so your “warefare imperialist” point isn’t an issue for me.

    • Brian H

      I have no idea what that means. Sounds really smart and intellectual though.

  • Gary Russell

    Do you mean that his VOICE “sounds an awful lot like Bush”?

  • Troy La Mana

    On thing though, Pence sounds an awful lot like Bush. I was a little disconcerted about it.

  • Gary Russell

    I took your advice. I went to YouTube and listened to Pence’s speech at CPAC.
    Very impressive. I could certainly support him.

    • JE

      Be careful. “I heard a speech and now i like the guy” is what got us the current mess of an administration.

      • Gary Russell

        Right you are, JE, right you are.
        I was referring to the words, though, not the delivery and mad teleprompter skills.

        • Alaina

          Actually, he didn’t use a teleprompter… he used notes. I sat in the front row just to the right of the podium and saw him flipping pages. Romney is the only one I saw all weekend (and I saw all the headliners and most everyone else) that used the teleprompter.

  • David Kaiser, Editor

    I’m probably either the best or the worst person to comment on this whole situation, because frankly, most people on here would not consider me a conservative.

    So either you will take what I have to say as either an outsider who doesn’t understand, or someone who can give a bit more of an unvarnished opinion on the situation.

    If you are the former, just stop reading now. However, if you are the latter, here’s what I think:

    This straw poll is less about Ron Paul winning and more about the continued fact that there is no one in politics who is stepping up as a conservative leader, at least in the eyes of the rank and file.

    Sure, there are plenty out there who want to lead, but they are all flawed, at least I see them as being considered flawed by the majority of conservatives.

    Ron Paul won for two reasons – he steadfastly holds to the most traditional of conservative concepts: fiscal responsibility and small government, and there was no one else that has held to these principles as consistently as Paul.

    Before the social and religious conservatives became a major force in the Republican party, it was the fiscal and limited government Republicans that formed the core of the conservative wing of the GOP.

    Ron Paul is a symbol of that form of conservationism that, I believe, is looking to reassert itself as the leaders of the GOP.

    Ron Paul is a good man, and has ideas that many conservatives can agree on. He also has some ideas that just won’t work in modern America.

    We can’t become an isolationist state again.

    We can’t go back to the gold standard or anything other than the current fiat system we run.

    It’s not that these ideas have no merit, I just don’t see how we can make changes like some of the things he proposes. It is just not practical.

    I think Ron Paul winning the CPAC is a cry from the party’s membership for a leader, not sensing any among the potential contenders for 2012. If a candidate ever emerged that was a true fiscal and small government conservative, that would also be a smidgen progressive on social issues, I would be lined up right behind them.

    I also believe that this mystery candidate would be able to pull droves from the “victory pool”, which is my own pet term for independents, RINOs, and Blue Dog Democrats. The candidate that gets these three groups, plus can hold their own base, wins elections. By a lot.

    The last person that did that effectively (takes a deep breath as he says this), was Bill Clinton.

    I know Billy strikes a lot of raw nerves with people, but if you look strictly as the coalition be built, he was a moderate Democrat who was able to hold on to the liberals, while reclaiming the Reagan Democrats, winning a lot of independents, and even stole a few moderate Republicans.

    *pants out of breath*

    So to conclude my little rant, who could that person be?

    I really don’t know. Alania has offered up Pence as her choice; I honestly don’t know enough about him to say if he’d float my boat.

    I would love to see General David Petreaus’ stands on social issues, because I admire his leadership and integrity. But he’s a political newbie with no real articulated stands on major issues.

    What I do not want is a “no at all costs to anything and everything the Democrats say and do”, which is why I rule out someone like Eric Cantor, for example, outright.

    This is just my take, my stand, and my feelings on this whole issue.

    If anyone cares :)

    • Mrs Rusty Shackleford

      Awwwwwwwww.. Now go take a nap! LOL

      • David Kaiser, Editor

        I need one!

    • Alaina

      Seriously… check out Pence. I’m still learning about him, but he seems pretty great from what I’ve learned so far. Plus, he (and Rubio) had everyone at CPAC talking. Everyone who heard him speak said he was their favorite (or Rubio was their favorite followed by Pence) and those that missed him said they hear a lot about him and wished they hadn’t.

      He has a conservative record, he can energize a crowd and he’s good looking (sorry to say it, but that counts).

      • Troy La Mana

        I just listened to his CPAC speech and I would have to say I agree with him 85%. A little too much religion for me but overall he said the right things.

        • Red State Eddio

          You atheist, you. ;-)

      • Red State Eddio

        Sounds like to Alaina that the ‘P’ in GOP stands for “pin-up”: first Brown, now Pence. Maybe that’ll be the ‘swoon’ ticket… ;-)

        I would like to see a couple of these guys: Pence, Ryan, Coburn, etc. form a team committed to getting every ‘R’ onto the same page, using Ryan’s Roadmap as the blueprint. I think if they could unify and rally them, not just AGAINST Obama, but FOR a future designed like the Roadmap, they’d start resonating with the Tea Party crowd.

      • Brian H

        Check out his clip from Pence. He, oo, has my vote….this speach ad me at hello.

    • Troy La Mana

      I couldn’t agree with you more except for that one line about saying no to Democrats. Compromising the beliefs of the party is what got them into the situation they are in now. The only reason Clinton was successful and popular is because he stole Republican ideas and made them his own. I think that is why he was hated so much, that and the scandals.

      Last election I thought Thompson was at least a viable candidate that I could believe in 90% of the time. The world still wonders why he never ran full out. Paul was the only other candidate left I could get behind. Unless someone takes the Tea Part platform and runs a campaign as if it was the Bible I don’t see anyone else I could vote for in 2012.

      • David Kaiser, Editor

        Troy – thanks for the input. I guess my point about saying “no” to Democrats is that I don’t believe in dimissing any ideas, even if they are ones I personally don’t agree with.

        Listen to all, talk it out and then go with what’s best.

        I think its at least worth listening, even if 90% of the time you don’t agree.

        • Troy La Mana

          I always listen to the other side. I just disagree with the majority of what they say.

          Of course, I believe the GOP has compromised its own beliefs.

          • Brian H

            Troy. As a voter you have every right to sit it out if you can’t find the perfect candidate. The right to vote also extends to the right not to vote. Unfortunately, that action will likely end up leading to another 4 years of Obama. I know most everyone in here hated McCain,but, to suggest that there is no difference between what would have been a McCain admin. and what is an Obama admin. is absurd.

            I beleive that McCain was the most likely GOP candidate who could have challenged Obama in the political climate of 2008. Not that I think he was perfect by any stretch. I just simply believe the Obama margin of victory would have been even greater with the other horses, although I respect many of them greatly.

            • Troy La Mana

              No Brian, I have the right to vote for the candidate that I feel is best for the country. I made the mistake of switching my vote to McCain in the booth.
              It wouldn’t have mattered so I’ll just stick to my ideals no matter the cost.

    • Boru

      “We can’t become an isolationist state again.”


      You blew your cover. Only neocons refer to Ron Paul’s principles as isolationist.

      • Brian H

        Proud “neocon” here!!!

  • Brian H

    I do appreciate the energy and consistency the Pauliites bring to the table. I hope they use it to support the best legit electable candidate we can field.

    One thing the lsat election has shown us all is that elections have consequences. Primaries are for ALL the internal fighting and posturing we can bring, but in the general election we need support the candidate that is going to stop this high speed train to a European society.

    • Troy La Mana

      As long as that person has a platform in line with the ideals that Ron Paul has set forth I would be willing to listen.

  • Troy La Mana

    This was the largest vote in CPAC history.

  • Promise Kept

    Thank you Eddio, It was time to open a fresh thread on this topic.

    “Ron Paul stole…er, rigged…I mean, won the straw poll released on Sunday (that was for all the conspiracy theorists among us).”

    There are baseless c.t.s’ among us, as you demonstrated by the awkward way they go about dealing with scientifically-based statistic data offered in the demographic breakdown of the CPAC participants who even bothered to vote in this.

    It was reported that less than 25% of the attendees participated in the straw-poll. I don’t know how that sits with past events, but I was shocked to learn that a conservative political summit like this would have over 75% of it aspiring leadership and activist failing to bother saying ANYTHING by means of this poll.

    Maybe that would explain the number of Dr. Pauls’
    supporters dominated the field. They know what they believe in and who represents their understanding of how government is supposed to work. They knew what they were there for, and I dare say that statistically, few, if any, neglected to vote.

    Of course a CPAC straw-poll wouldn’t serve to measure how rank and file Republican responses would go if given the same questions, but if so few in “leadership” cared to even vote at all, and those who did were so divided into so many small camps, then by what criteria do you see “electability” emerging?

    • Alaina

      One thing to keep in mind about that voting is that it ends at 1:00 on Friday, which is only halfway through the conference. I don’t know the number, but many participants buy day passes rather than weekend passes to hear specific people speak. It’s quite likely that the people who bought day passes on Friday didn’t come until the afternoon to hear Romney speak and everyone who only bought a day pass for Saturday did not have a chance to vote.

      Like I said Sunday, there was a very strong showing from Campaign for Liberty, an organization who supports Ron Paul, and I guarantee you every single on of them voted. They made sure everyone knew they were there. I received almost 30 flyers from them on Friday and Saturday and wish I would have counted the ones from Wednesday and Thursday. I’m not knocking that group, they did an exceptional job organizing and there wasn’t a single organization that was there to support any other politician.

      In addition, 53% of the people who voted in the straw poll were 25 or under. That’s Paul’s key demographic.

      I wouldn’t call the people who attend CPAC “leadership.” The people who are invited to speak, yes, but most of the people who attend are average people who are either interested or involved at the local level.

      If the straw poll was taken Saturday afternoon instead, I guarantee you it would have been a very different story. Maybe not so much for Paul because of CFL and the 6,000 students in attendance, but I would be willing to bet everything I own that it would completely change the rest of the field with Pence on top.

      I think Palin is out of it. A lot of the people I talked to about her said that they voted for her (not McCain) in 2008, but probably wouldn’t vote for her again after quitting in the middle of her term.

      Romney still has a solid base, but I can’t understand why.

      I’m making my prediction now. If Pence decides to run (and assuming he doesn’t make some bonehead move between now and them), he will be our 2012 nominee. It’s nice to finally have someone in the field to be excited about.

      • Alaina

        Oh, and Romney just announced that he’s backing McCain. I think that will hurt him.

        • Whodat

          I could not agree more! If Romney had any thought of conjuring up some conservative credentials, by endorsing lib-leanin’ Mac, he proved again that Massachusetts does not produce conservatives.

        • kristen

          Seriously, that’s a bad move in my book.

  • Whodat

    Me thinks Palin was punished for not showing up, so she scored low. Bad girl!

    Ron Paul scored well because there is nobody else who excites anybody much. A recent national poll had Mitt at only 14%, with Palin at 11% and the rest in single digits (obviously, “none of the above” scored over half)- so, in a Conservative-only universe, that leaves a vacuum for the Ron Paul libertarians to fill. To bad it does not transfer to the real world.

  • Troy La Mana

    Careful or you will be called a Paul-ite!

    I never understood why Republicans attack Paul so much. If you listen to his message it is one they themselves should agree upon. Any candidate that runs on this platform would win by a large margin.